|
Presenting Type Dynamically
Jeanne Marlowe, M.A.
Page 3 |
|
Step 2: Self-Select
 After explaining the four dichotomies, verify that most participants have recorded all four preferences. Combining letters gives more than the sum of their parts. Each preference modifies the others in patterned ways. When first learning type, most people find it easier to look at groups of 4 than at all 16 types. One possible group, temperament, could be used with groups familiar with this theory. Kathy Myers gives an entertaining account of the way these two theories grew up together. See a summary of basic temperament characteristics, based on the work of Keirsey (1987), Giovannoni, Berens, and Cooper (1990), and Delunas (1992). Giving examples of predictable misunderstandings and conflicts makes the differences relevant to participants. To ensure comprehension, have participants identify which temperament is most likely to exhibit specific characteristics or say famous quotes, such as those in the MBTI Challenge Cards (Davis/Neal & Associates, 1989). These cards could be used as a group activity or shown on a transparency. Example quotations include: "Punctuality is the soul of business." --Thomas Haliburton (SJ); "They tell me I often go out on a limb. Well, that's where I like to be." --Henry Kaiser (SP).
Groups could also be formed around functional pairs: ST, SF, NF, NT or attitudes: IP, EP, EJ, IJ. Thomson's (1998) insights on the latter can be concisely summarized on a handout.
"The tension between our Judging and Perceiving functions
is the source of creativity and psychological development." |
J tries to bring order to the outer world
Focus is on direction and boundary conditions |
P tries to align with inherent order of world Drawn to novelty and variation, but periods of enthusiasm and receptivity alternate with overload and withdrawal |
| J seeks order and standards that can be counted regardless of people's inner circumstances |
P seeks underlying principle that holds true despite on diversity of outer circumstances |
E__P: Depend on direct experience for primary understanding of life
Growing edge: bring introverted judgment into dialog with accustomed approach to life
1. Recognize limits before getting involved
2. Stick with unrewarding 'chore'; see boredom and irritation as positive indicators of growth |
E__J: Depend on rational predictability for primary experience of life
Growing edge: bring immediate experience of a situation into dialog with judgment
1. Stay open to new data; recognize impact of schedules and routines on self and others
2. Make room for needs unrelated to goal at hand; stop seeing play as indulgence |
I__P: Like EPs, they understand outward reality by way of direct experience and may have a similar resistance to limiting their options in areas that interest them
Growing edge: use extraverted perception more actively to shape inner values
1. Engage in experiences that have real meaning, either on job or as hobby
2. Endure conflict between ideals and the actual potential of external circumstances; see the danger of keeping too much of self in reserve |
I__J: Like EJs, they are most comfortable when they can establish predictable reference points in the external world, but they don't take systems of thought for granted the way EJs do. By accumulating more info than a situation requires, they may overestimate others' interest and overmeet expectations. Others may see them as losing track of time and purpose (tunnel vision).
Growing edge: apply extraverted judgment less to the systems of others and more to the data of own mind
1. Limit and organize data of inner world; request specific guidelines
2. Endure conflict between need to acquire more info and effort to articulate what's already known |
Page 4, Presenting Type Dynamically >>>
|
|
